Mary Bard Jensen Society

Mary Bard Jensen Fan Club and Society. Join fans of the beloved writer Mary Bard Jensen (1904 - 1970) . A literary Society and Fan Club. Mary Bard Jensen is the sister of Betty MacDonald, the author of The egg and I and the Mrs. Piggle-Wiggle Series. Betty MacDonald and Mary Bard Jensen are beloved all over the world. Don't miss Wolfgang Hampel's Mary Bard and Betty MacDonald biography and the very funny and witty interviews on CD and DVD!

Friday, September 1, 2017

Betty MacDonald fan club fans,welcome September!September will be a very exciting month for Betty MacDonald fan club fans with many activities.More info will come soon.We are working on Betty MacDonald fan club newsletter September with new fascinating facts.

If
you join us a follower of Betty MacDonald fan club blog during
September you'll get a special Betty MacDonald fan club surprise.

Tell us your email-address, please.

Thanks a million for your support and interest! Happy September!Many greetingsLinde, Astrid, Greta and Lund family

The
global reaction has been fierce and almost exclusively in favor of
keeping the United States in the 2015 agreement. In Europe last week, world leaders privately implored you not to bolt.

President
Emmanuel Macron of France told reporters that he urged you not to
make a “hasty decision.” Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany called her
discussions with you “very difficult, if not to say very
dissatisfying.”

The
global pressure campaign continued on Tuesday with the speech by Mr.
Guterres at New York University. While not specifically mentioning you
in his speech, the secretary general of the United Nations
referred to “those who might hold divergent perspectives” as he called
for all countries to fulfill the promises they made. After the speech,
in answer to a question from the audience, Mr. Guterres said he hoped
that the United States would stick to the deal, or that American
businesses would if the government did not.

“It
is absolutely essential that the world implements the Paris Agreement —
and that we fulfill that duty with increased ambition,” Mr. Guterres
said. “The real danger is not the threat to one’s economy that comes
from acting. It is, instead, the risk to one’s economy by failing to
act.”

Thank you so much in advance for your support and interest.Many Betty MacDonald - and Wolfgang Hampel fans are very interested in a Wolfgang Hampel CD and DVD with his
very funny poems and stories. We are going to publish new Betty MacDonald essays on Betty MacDonald's gardens and nature in Washington State.Tell us the names of this mysterious couple please and you can win a very new Betty MacDonald documentary.

You'll be able to see wonderful cards for Betty MacDonald with very touching messages for example by her daughter Joan MacDonald Keil or her good friend Monica Sone.

There will be a Betty MacDonald fan club birthday event DVD available.

We got very interesting new info for updated Betty MacDonald biography.Betty MacDonald fan club founder Wolfgang Hampel
and Betty MacDonald fan club research team are going to include all
these new details and info in updated Betty MacDonald biography.

More info in Betty MacDonald fan club newsletter March.

If you'd like to join Betty MacDonald fan club you only have to press the join button on Betty MacDonald fan club blog.New Betty MacDonald fan club fans will receive a special Betty MacDonald fan club Welcome gift during March.

I agree with Betty in this very witty Betty MacDonald story Betty MacDonald: Nothing more to say by Wolfgang Hampel.

I
can't imagine to live in a country with him as so-called elected
President although there are very good reasons to remain there to fight
against these brainless politics.

Democrats are criticizing President Donald Trump for firing U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara,
saying it is a further window into the character of Mr. Trump and an
effort to sideline critical voices in the judicial branch.Senate
Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-New York), who represents the state in
which Bharara is based, said he was “caught off guard” by the
announcement and that Bharara will be “sorely missed” in New York.

Don't miss these very interesting articles below, please.

Lately,
it appears Trump has gone back into the field to drag in a whole new
bunch of State contenders.

My favorite is Representative Dana
Rohrabacher of California, a person you have probably never heard of
even though he’s been in Congress since the 1980s and is currently head
of the prestigious Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia and Emerging Threats.

I think the future dinosaur flatulence will be the behaviour of 'Pussy' and his very strange government.

Poor World! Poor America!

Don't miss these very interesting articles below, please.

The most difficult case in Mrs.Piggle-Wiggle's career

Hello 'Pussy', this is Mrs. Piggle-Wiggle.

You
took calls from foreign leaders on unsecured phone lines, without
consultung the State Department. We have to change your silly behaviour
with a new Mrs. Piggle-Wiggle cure. I know you are the most difficult
case in my career - but we have to try everything.......................

Besides him ( by the way the First Lady's place ) his 10 year old son was bored to death and listened to this 'exciting' victory speech.

The old man could be his great-grandfather.

The
boy was very tired and thought: I don't know what this old guy is
talking about. Come on and finish it, please. I'd like to go to bed.Dear 'great-grandfather' continued and praised the Democratic candidate.

The series premiered on September 3,
1951, the same day as "Search for Tomorrow," and ended on August 1,
1952.

Although it did well in the ratings, it had difficulty
attracting a steady sponsor. This episode features Betty Lynn (later
known for her work on "The Andy Griffith Show") as Betty MacDonald, John
Craven as Bob MacDonald, Doris Rich as Ma Kettle, and Frank Twedell as
Pa Kettle.

Betty MacDonald fan club exhibition will be fascinating with the international book editions and letters by Betty MacDonald.I can't wait to see the new Betty MacDonald documentary.

Today in Trump: March 13, 2017

President Donald Trump listens during
a meeting on healthcare in the Roosevelt Room of the White House in
Washington, Friday, March 10, 2017.

Evan Vucci, AP

Today in the Trump Administration

Trump Schedule

President Trump is at the White House.

What you missed yesterday

Democrats blast Trump for firing U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara

Democrats are criticizing President Donald Trump for firing U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara,
saying it is a further window into the character of Mr. Trump and an
effort to sideline critical voices in the judicial branch.Senate
Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-New York), who represents the state in
which Bharara is based, said he was “caught off guard” by the
announcement and that Bharara will be “sorely missed” in New York.

Paul Ryan says he hasn’t seen anything to support Trump’s wiretapping claims

House Speaker Paul Ryan said in an interview airing Sunday that
he has not seen anything to suggest former President Obama wiretapped
President Donald Trump during the 2016 election -- but that what Mr.
Trump tweets is “outside of [his] control” and that the congressional
investigation will clear up the truth.“That’s outside of my
control, what is tweeted or what isn’t tweeted. We’re focused on health
care. The president’s focused on health care,” Ryan said in an interview
with CBS’ “Face the Nation.” “I think he’s frustrated with this whole
thing about Russia. I think he’s frustrated with selective leaks coming
from parts of government that malign his campaign.”

Schedule

Revised Trump travel ban gets first legal blow

Mar 12, 2017

AFPWASHINGTON

President
Donald Trump's revamped travel ban is facing its first major legal
setback, after a federal judge halted enforcement of the directive that
would deny US entry to the wife and child of a Syrian refugee already
granted asylum.In a preliminary restraining order issued Friday that
applies only to the Syrian man and his family, US District Judge
William Conley in Wisconsin said the plaintiff"is at great risk of
suffering irreparable harm" if the directive is carried out. The man
chose to remain anonymous because his wife and child are still living in
war-wracked Aleppo.The order marked the first ruling against the
revised directive, which temporarily closes US borders to all refugees
and citizens from six mainly-Muslim countries.It denies US entry to
all refugees for 120 days and halts for 90 days the granting of visas to
nationals from Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Yemen and Sudan. The new
order, unveiled Monday, is due to go into effect March 16. Lifting an
indefinite Syrian refugee travel ban and reducing the number of
blacklisted countries by removing Iraq, it replaces a previous iteration
issued in January that was blocked in federal court."The court
appreciates that there may be important differences between the original
executive order and the revised executive order issued on March 6,
2017," Conley wrote."As the order applies to the plaintiff here,
however, the court finds his claims have at least some chance of
prevailing for the reasons articulated by other courts."He set a
hearing for March 21. In another legal challenge, the American Civil
Liberties Union filed a complaint on behalf of several refugee
assistance groups over the controversial executive order.The suit
alleges that the new executive order violates the constitutional
protection of freedom of religion in that it is"intended and designed to
target and discriminate against Muslims, and it does just that in
operation."

Trump’s New Travel Ban May Be Hard to Beat. But States Are Trying.

Attorney General Bob Ferguson
of Washington, in Seattle on Thursday, said President Trump’s new
travel ban was less sweeping than the original, “but that does not mean
it has cured its constitutional problems.”Credit
Jason Redmond/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

President
Trump’s executive order banning travel from six predominantly Muslim
countries faced a new front of opposition from the states on Thursday,
as the attorney general of Washington announced that he would seek to block the order from taking effect next week.

Backed
by several fellow Democratic attorneys general, Bob Ferguson of
Washington said he would ask a federal district judge, James Robart, to
extend an order freezing the first version of Mr. Trump’s travel ban and
apply it to the updated restrictions the White House unveiled on Monday.

In
a news conference on Thursday, Mr. Ferguson acknowledged that Mr.
Trump’s updated order was less sweeping than its predecessor. But he
argued that the travel restrictions remained “effectively a Muslim ban,”
with many of the same legal weaknesses as the first version.

“It’s
fair to say that the revised executive order does narrow the scope of
who’s impacted by it in an adverse way,” Mr. Ferguson said. “But that
does not mean it has cured its constitutional problems.”

His
announcement in Seattle opened a new phase in the legal battle over Mr.
Trump’s attempt to sharply limit travel to the United States from a
group of majority-Muslim countries — including Syria, Libya and Iran —
as a collection of Democratic-leaning states that attacked the first ban
increasingly mass their efforts behind Mr. Ferguson’s litigation.

Among
the attorneys general backing Mr. Ferguson on Thursday were Eric T.
Schneiderman of New York and Maura Healey of Massachusetts, both of whom
dropped separate litigation against Mr. Trump to join Mr. Ferguson’s
suit, and Ellen F. Rosenblum of Oregon. Mr. Ferguson and his colleagues,
along with Attorney General Lori Swanson of Minnesota, are expected to
file updated complaints aimed at taking down the new travel order in the
coming days.

The attorney general of Hawaii, Doug Chin, who is also a Democrat, filed a separate lawsuit earlier this week
challenging the constitutionality of Mr. Trump’s adjusted order and
asking a different court to prevent it from going into effect.

Sean
Spicer, Mr. Trump’s chief spokesman, told reporters on Thursday that
the White House was “very comfortable” with the defensibility of the new order. He said the administration was not concerned about the challenge filed by Hawaii.

Mr.
Trump and his advisers have presented the travel regulations as an
effort to protect national security and insist they are not motivated by
religious discrimination, though Mr. Trump campaigned on banning Muslim
travelers from entering the country.

“We feel very confident with how that was crafted and the input that was given,” Mr. Spicer said of the new order.

Still,
the renewed legal assault on Mr. Trump’s policy could drag his
administration into another messy court battle, even as Mr. Trump has
tried to shift his attention away from the travel ban and toward a
complex and politically fraught overhaul of the health care system.

In
redrawing Mr. Trump’s executive order on travel from the Middle East,
the administration had hoped to eliminate many of the vulnerabilities
that doomed the first version. Federal courts imposed a national freeze on its implementation, prompting Mr. Trump to attack the judiciary — and Judge Robart specifically — in an outburst on Twitter.

Aiming
to head off another courtroom quagmire, Mr. Trump explicitly exempted
several categories of travelers from the revised ban, including green
card holders and people with other existing visas, and eliminated a
provision that would have given special treatment to Christians.

It
also removed Iraq from the list of countries covered and got rid of a
permanent ban on refugee admissions from Syria. And rather than taking
immediate effect, like the first presidential decree, the new order has
an effective date of March 16.

But
Mr. Ferguson said Washington State would argue in court that it should
be up to a judge, not Mr. Trump, to decide if his new policy can go into
effect, given that a court blocked the implementation of a similar
executive order while litigation unfolds.

Allowing
Mr. Trump’s new order to go into effect, Mr. Ferguson said, could lead
to a “game of whack-a-mole,” in which the president could answer any
court’s rebuke by making modest tweaks to his own policy and then
hastening to implement it.

Among
Democratic attorneys general, there is broad consensus that Mr. Trump’s
new order may be more difficult to fight in court. Mr. Ferguson
repeatedly acknowledged that it would affect fewer people than the
earlier order, while insisting that there was clear evidence that Mr.
Trump intended the restrictions to function as a crackdown on Muslim
travelers.

Mr.
Ferguson said his office was in touch with a number of people and
institutions that would be harmed by the new ban, including public
universities and Washington residents with family overseas, in crafting
its case against the executive order. Noah Purcell, the solicitor
general of Washington State, said there had also been “conversations
with businesses in Washington” about the order’s impact on the state.

Mr.
Purcell also suggested that the state would highlight comments from
Trump administration officials describing the new travel ban as a modest
revision, to show that it was intended to dispense with legal
challenges without meaningfully changing policy.

He
appeared to be alluding in part to a statement from Stephen Miller, a
senior aide to Mr. Trump, who said on television that the new ban would
have the same “basic policy outcome” as the previous version.

Hawaii’s attorney general also cited Mr. Miller’s statement in his complaint challenging the new ban.

A version of this article appears in print on March 10, 2017, on Page A14 of the New York edition with the headline: States Band Together to Fight Rewritten Immigration Order. Order Reprints|

White House Officials Say Trump Isn’t Target of Any Investigation

White House Press Secretary
Sean Spicer told reporters on Wednesday: “There is no reason that we
have to think the president is the target of any investigation
whatsoever.”Credit
Doug Mills/The New York Times

WASHINGTON
— White House officials declared on Wednesday that President Trump was
not the target of an investigation, five days after Mr. Trump himself raised the prospect with an unsubstantiated claim that his predecessor ordered the wiretapping of Trump Tower.

After
first refusing to disavow Mr. Trump’s allegations, made in a series of
Twitter posts, and instead calling for Congress to investigate them, the
press secretary, Sean Spicer, told reporters, “There is no reason that
we have to think the president is the target of any investigation
whatsoever.”

Mr.
Spicer’s statement, which he read from a sheet of paper that was handed
to him at the end of his briefing, reinforced the conundrum Mr. Trump’s
tweets have created for the White House: Either the president’s
assertions are baseless, or he may have implicated himself in a
government investigation of contacts between his presidential campaign
and Russia.

Until Wednesday, Mr. Spicer had steadfastly declined to discuss Mr. Trump’s assertion that former President Barack Obama
ordered wiretap surveillance of Trump Tower — an act that Mr. Trump
condemned as a scandal comparable in scale to McCarthyism or Watergate.

Early
into Wednesday’s briefing, Mr. Spicer stuck to the policy he has
followed since the storm broke over Mr. Trump’s posts. Asked whether the
president was the target of a counterintelligence inquiry, he replied:
“I think that’s what we need to find out. There’s obviously a lot of
concern.”

President Trump during a meeting at the White House on Tuesday.Credit
Doug Mills/The New York Times

But
after an aide slipped Mr. Spicer a note, he circled back to clarify
that “there is no reason to believe there is any type of investigation
with respect to the Department of Justice.” The press secretary insisted
he was not disavowing the president, who posted his tweets early on
Saturday morning from Mar-a-Lago, his resort in Palm Beach, Fla.

“The tweet dealt with wiretaps,” Mr. Spicer said. “The other is an investigation. They are two separate issues.”

While the F.B.I.
is conducting a wide-ranging counterintelligence investigation into
Russian interference with the 2016 presidential election, there is no
public evidence that Mr. Trump is a target. The Justice Department
defines “target” as someone whom investigators have substantial evidence
against and who is likely to be indicted.

Current
and former officials have said repeatedly that although they were
concerned about intelligence suggesting meetings between associates of
Mr. Trump’s and Russian officials, they have developed no evidence of
collusion between Mr. Trump’s campaign and Russia’s hacking efforts. Mr.
Spicer cited the former director of national intelligence, James R.
Clapper Jr., who last Sunday made that point on the NBC program “Meet
the Press.”

But
Mr. Clapper also said he had no knowledge the government had sought a
warrant from a foreign intelligence court to install a wiretap in Trump
Tower. On Saturday, the director of the F.B.I., James B. Comey, asked the Justice Department to publicly reject Mr. Trump’s claim that his agency had wiretapped his phones. The department has refused to do so.

Mr.
Spicer complained bitterly about news media coverage of ties between
Mr. Trump and Russia, saying it was fueled by leaks from anonymous
sources, none of which had been substantiated.

“It’s
interesting how many times this fake narrative gets repeated over and
over and over again,” he said. “And yet no evidence has ever been
suggested that shows the president has anything to do with any of the
things that are being said. It’s a recycled story, over and over and
over again.”

The
problem for the White House is that Mr. Trump fueled this week’s cycle
of stories himself. On Wednesday, the top Republican and Democrat on the
Senate’s Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism asked the F.B.I.
and the Justice Department for evidence that the government had sought
legal permission to tap Mr. Trump’s phones.

The
request came in a letter from Senators Lindsey Graham, Republican of
South Carolina, and Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, to Mr.
Comey and the acting deputy attorney general, Dana Boente. Mr. Boente
is overseeing the Russia inquiry because Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself from any cases involving the Trump campaign and Russia, after acknowledging he met with Russia’s ambassador, Sergey I. Kislyak.

“We
request that the Department of Justice provide us copies of any warrant
applications and court orders — redacted as necessary to protect
intelligence sources and methods that may be compromised by disclosure,
and to protect any ongoing investigations — related to wiretaps of
President Trump, the Trump campaign or Trump Tower,” the senators wrote.

With
no evidence of wiretaps emerging, the White House has been forced into a
defensive communications strategy. It has curtailed Mr. Trump’s
appearances before cameras, where reporters could ask him about his
claims. Mr. Spicer held his briefing on Monday without TV cameras,
though on Tuesday and Wednesday, he answered questions at length and
before the cameras.

On
Tuesday, the administration sent the secretary of homeland security,
John F. Kelly, on CNN, where he, too, provided no evidence of any
wiretapping. However, Mr. Kelly said, “if the president of the United
States said that, he’s got his reasons to say it.”

Donald Trump has "no
regrets" about accusing his predecessor of wiretapping Trump Tower, the
White House press secretary has insisted.Sean Spicer said that Mr Trump's explosive allegations over
the weekend still stood, and that the president would now wait for
investigations to run their course.

Asked whether it was
not a waste of time and money for congressional and senatorial
committees to investigate Mr Trump's baseless allegations, Mr Spicer
replied that it was "not about new proof".

And
the Twitter storm came, as ever, during the morning breakfast shows. Mr
Trump appeared at times to be live-tweeting Fox News, joining in the
conversation with their Twitter handle @FoxAndFriends.He then launched a defence of his six-week old
administration, amid a series of reports at the weekend detailing
blazing, expletive-filled rows within the Oval Office, and staff members
being “grounded” in Mr Trump’s fury.“Don't let the FAKE NEWS tell you that there is big
infighting in the Trump Admin. We are getting along great, and getting
major things done!” he tweeted.He also then went on to express his support for the
Republican plans to repeal and replace the hated Obamacare health
system, which were unveiled on Monday night.

Democrats
reacted with predictable anger, pointing out that there was no detail
on how the scheme would be paid for and saying it would harm poorer
Americans.“Trumpcare doesn’t replace the Affordable Care Act, it
forces millions of Americans to pay more for less care,” said Chuck
Schumer, the Democrat leader of the senate.More worryingly for the Republicans, many within their own
party expressed concerns. Rand Paul, the high-profile Kentucky senator,
described it as “Obamacare light,” saying it did not go far enough.

The
Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, also described it as
“flawed”, and on Tuesday night the Freedom Caucus, a group of around 30
hard-liners in the House who criticised earlier versions of the bill,
will meet to discuss the health-care bill, and consider presenting a
list of demands to Republican leaders.

Jason
Chaffetz, the Utah congressman who is chair of the House Oversight and
Government Reform Committee, made a clumsy defence of the plan, and
brushed off the suggestion that it could lead to less coverage for
low-income Americans.“Americans have choices, and they have got to make a
choice,” he said. “So maybe rather than getting that iPhone they just
love, that they want to go spend hundreds of dollars on, maybe they
should invest in their own health care. They’ve got to make those
decisions themselves.”A new iPhone currently costs around $700 (£575). But a year
of health insurance for an individual is over $6,000, meaning that an
iPhone is only slightly more than one month of insurance.

President Donald Trump
on Monday signed a long-awaited new travel ban as it emerged that the
FBI is investigating 300 people admitted as refugees for links to the
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

The ban was immediately met with threats of legal
action. Eric Schneiderman, New York's attorney general, said he was
scrutinising the new order and stood ready to challenge it.

“While the White House
may have made changes to the ban, the intent to discriminate against
Muslims remains clear,” he said. “This doesn’t just harm the families
caught in the chaos of President Trump’s draconian policies – it’s
diametrically opposed to our values, and makes us less safe.”

Mr Trump signed the executive order into effect on
Monday following conference calls from his staff explaining the provisos
in the law.

At
the same time, the department of homeland security told congressmen
that the FBI was investigating 300 people admitted as refugees for links
to the so-called Islamic State. The 300 refugees were part of 1,000
counterterrorism investigations involving Islamic State or individuals
inspired by the militant group, congressional sources said. No details
were given as to the cases, or the time frame.

But the news was clearly timed to boost support for Mr Trump’s ban.According to his executive order, all refugee arrivals will
be stopped for a period of 120 days. Unlike in the previous text, Syrian
refugees are not singled out for a permanent ban on entry.Furthermore, citizens from six countries will, from March
16, be prevented from entering the United States, unless they have
previously been granted a visa.

Iraq
has been dropped from the list of six countries – now only citizens of
Iran, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Libya and Yemen are banned. And the new ban does not priorities entry for “persecuted
minorities” – a proviso which critics said unfairly blocked the entry of
Muslims.Mr Trump’s first attempt to implement a travel ban, in
January, was a chaotic series of announcements, clarifications, wrongful
detentions, protests and court cases that culminated in an appeals
court ruling that it was unlawful. Nigeria - a country not on the list -
on Monday warned its citizens not to travel to the US after many were
sent home at the airport.But this time round the administration was determined to ensure that the roll-out of the ban was smooth.Rex Tillerson, the secretary of state, on Monday used a
press conference to reassure US allies that the measures would be
implemented in an “orderly” way.

“As threats to our security continue to evolve and change,
common sense dictates that we continually reevaluate and reassess the
systems we rely upon to protect our country,” he said. “While no system
can be made completely infallible, the American people can have high
confidence we are identifying ways to improve the vetting process and
thus keep terrorists from entering our country.

“To our allies and partners around the world, please
understand this order is part of our ongoing efforts to eliminate
vulnerabilities that radical Islamist terrorists can and will exploit
for destructive ends.”He explained that the
decision to drop Iraq from the list of countries was due to an “intense
review” of security procedures, and a realisation that the state
department and the government of Iraq were already working on a rigorous
screening programme.Jeff Sessions, the attorney general, then laid out why the
government felt the ban was necessary, stating that “the majority of
people convicted in our courts for terrorism-related offenses since 9/11
came here from abroad.”

He
added: “The department of justice believes that this executive order,
just as the first executive order, is a lawful and proper exercise of
presidential authority.”John Kelly, the homeland security chief, said: “Unregulated,
unvetted travel is not a universal privilege, especially when national
security is at stake.”The roll-out was greeted with approval by most Republicans – even those who initially criticised the first attempt.Paul Ryan, speaker of the house, praised it while Lindsey
Graham, a Republican senator known for his scathing response to many of
Mr Trump’s actions, said he thought it would withstand legal challenges."It's drafted in a fashion as to not be a religious ban, but
a ban on individuals coming from compromised governments and failed
states,” he said. “This executive order will help achieve President
Trump’s goal of making us safer."

Bob
Ferguson, the attorney general for Washington state - who successfully
challenged Mr Trump's initial travel ban in court – said the president
"has capitulated on numerous key provisions blocked by our lawsuit."

They
include banning legal permanent residents, visa holders and dual
citizens from entering the country, as well as explicit preferences
based on religion.But critics of the travel ban were not impressed by the new
wording. Amnesty International described it as “wrong-headed and
counter-productive.”

Ben Carson tries to clarify slave comments

Ben
Carson, the new secretary of the US Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD), is facing a backlash after referring to slaves
brought to the United States against their will as "immigrants", writes Chris Graham.In an introductory speech to staff at the HUD after he was
confirmed by the Senate last week, Mr Carson shared anecdotes from his
past career as a neurosurgeon and praised immigrants who worked long
hours to build a better life for their children.

Trump, Offering No Evidence, Says Obama Tapped His Phones

President Barack Obama and
President-elect Donald J. Trump on Inauguration Day. Mr. Trump has
praised Mr. Obama repeatedly since taking office. But on Saturday, he
called his predecessor a “bad (or sick) guy.”Credit
Damon Winter/The New York Times

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — President Trump on Saturday accused former President Barack Obama
of tapping his phones at Trump Tower the month before the election,
leveling the explosive allegation without offering any evidence.

Mr.
Trump called his predecessor a “bad (or sick) guy” on Twitter as he
fired off a series of messages claiming that Mr. Obama “had my ‘wires
tapped.’” He likened the supposed tapping to “Nixon/Watergate” and “McCarthyism,” though he did not say where he had gotten his information.

A spokesman for Mr. Obama said any suggestion that the former president had ordered such surveillance was “simply false.”

During
the 2016 campaign, the federal authorities began an investigation into
links between Trump associates and the Russian government, an issue that
continues to dog Mr. Trump. His aides declined to clarify on Saturday
whether the president’s allegations were based on briefings from
intelligence or law enforcement officials — which could mean that Mr.
Trump was revealing previously unknown details about the investigation —
or on something else, like a news report.

But
a senior White House official said that Donald F. McGahn II, the
president’s chief counsel, was working to secure access to what Mr.
McGahn believed to be an order issued by the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Court authorizing some form of surveillance related to Mr.
Trump and his associates.

The
official offered no evidence to support the notion that such an order
exists. It would be a highly unusual breach of the Justice Department’s
traditional independence on law enforcement matters for the White House
to order it to turn over such an investigative document.

Any
request for information from a top White House official about a
continuing investigation would be a stunning departure from protocols
intended to insulate the F.B.I. from political pressure. It would be
even more surprising for the White House to seek information about a
case directly involving the president or his advisers, as does the case
involving the Russia contacts.

After
the White House received heavy criticism for the suggestion that Mr.
McGahn would breach Justice Department independence, a different
administration official said that the earlier statements about his
efforts had been overstated. The official said the counsel’s office was
looking at whether there was any legal possibility of gleaning
information without impeding or interfering with an investigation. The
counsel’s office does not know whether an investigation exists, the
official said.

Last
month, Reince Priebus, the White House chief of staff, came under fire
for asking a top F.B.I. official to publicly rebut news reports about
contacts between Trump campaign officials and the Russian government.

Sean
Spicer, the White House press secretary, said in a statement that the
“White House counsel is reviewing what options, if any, are available to
us.” Mr. McGahn did not respond to a request for comment. He was
traveling on Saturday to Florida to join the president at his estate,
Mar-a-Lago.

The
president’s decision on Saturday to lend the power of his office to
accusations against his predecessor of politically motivated wiretapping
— without offering any proof — was remarkable, even for a leader who
has repeatedly shown himself willing to make assertions that are false
or based on dubious sources.

It
would have been difficult for federal agents, working within the law,
to obtain a wiretap order to target Mr. Trump’s phone conversations. It
would have meant that the Justice Department had gathered sufficient
evidence to convince a federal judge that there was probable cause to
believe Mr. Trump had committed a serious crime or was an agent of a
foreign power, depending on whether it was a criminal investigation or a
foreign intelligence one.

Former
officials pointed to longstanding laws and procedures intended to
ensure that presidents cannot wiretap a rival for political purposes.

“A
cardinal rule of the Obama administration was that no White House
official ever interfered with any independent investigation led by the
Department of Justice,” said Kevin Lewis, a spokesman for Mr. Obama. “As
part of that practice, neither President Obama nor any White House
official ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen.”

Mr.
Trump asserted just the opposite in a series of five Twitter messages
beginning just minutes before sunrise in Florida, where the president is
spending the weekend.

In
the first message, the president said he had “just found out” that
“Obama had my ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower” before the election. Mr.
Trump’s reference to “wires tapped” raised the possibility that he was
referring to some other type of electronic surveillance and was using
the idea of phone tapping loosely.

The
president was adamant in conversations with several people throughout
the day on Saturday that he believed he was right about the wiretaps,
according to three people with direct knowledge of those conversations.

Two people close to Mr. Trump said they believed he was referring to a Breitbart News article, which
aides said had been passed around among his advisers. Mark Levin, a
conservative radio host, had also embraced the theory recently in a push
against what right-leaning commentators have been calling the “deep
state.”

The
Breitbart article, published on Friday, claimed that there was a series
of “known steps taken by President Barack Obama’s administration in its
last months to undermine Donald Trump’s
presidential campaign and, later, his new administration.” Stephen K.
Bannon, Mr. Trump’s chief strategist, once led Breitbart News.

If
Mr. Trump was motivated to take to Twitter after reading the Breitbart
article or listening to Mr. Levin, he was using a presidential megaphone
to spread dark theories of a broad conspiracy aimed at undermining his
presidential ambitions, and later his presidency.

Even
with the Breitbart article circulating, several of Mr. Trump’s advisers
were stunned by the president’s morning Twitter outburst. Those
advisers said they were uncertain about what specifically Mr. Trump was
referring to; one surmised that he may also have been referring to a
months-old news report about a secret surveillance warrant for
communications at his New York offices.

One
senior law enforcement official from the Obama administration, who has
direct knowledge of the F.B.I. investigation into Russia and of
government wiretapping, said that it was “100 percent untrue” that the
government had wiretapped Mr. Trump. The official, who asked for
anonymity to discuss matters related to investigations and intelligence,
said the White House owed the American people an explanation for the
president’s allegations.

Ben Rhodes, a former top national security aide to Mr. Obama, said in a Twitter message
directed at Mr. Trump on Saturday that “no president can order a
wiretap” and added, “Those restrictions were put in place to protect
citizens from people like you.”

Mr. Trump claimed the Obama administration ordered the phoned at his building in New York tapped.Credit
Victor J. Blue for The New York Times

The
House and Senate Intelligence Committees are moving forward with their
own investigations into Russia’s efforts to influence the election, and
they have said they will examine links between Mr. Trump’s associates
and the Russians.

Senator
Chris Coons, Democrat of Delaware, said on Friday that he believed
there were “transcripts” that would help document those contacts, though
he said he had not yet seen them.

“There
are transcripts that provide very helpful, very critical insights into
whether or not Russian intelligence or senior Russian political leaders —
including Vladimir Putin — were cooperating, were colluding, with the
Trump campaign at the highest levels to influence the outcome of our
election,” Mr. Coons told Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC. “I believe they
exist.”

In
a written statement on Saturday, a spokesman for Mr. Coons said that
the senator “did not imply that he is aware of transcripts indicating
collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.” The spokesman,
Sean Coit, said Mr. Coons had “simply stated that a full review of all
relevant transcripts and intelligence intercepts is necessary to
determine if collusion took place.”

The
New York Times reported in January that among the associates whose
links to Russia are being scrutinized are Paul Manafort, Mr. Trump’s
onetime campaign chairman; Carter Page, a businessman and foreign policy
adviser to the campaign; and Roger Stone, a longtime Republican
operative who said he was in touch with WikiLeaks at one point before it
released a trove of emails from John D. Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s
campaign chairman, last August. Mr. Stone later said he had communicated
with WikiLeaks through an intermediary.

Mr.
Trump appeared on Saturday to suggest that warrants had been issued by
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. He claimed that the Obama
administration had once been “turned down by court” in its supposed
efforts to listen in on conversations by Mr. Trump and his associates.

In
the fall, the F.B.I. examined computer data showing an odd stream of
activity between a Trump Organization server and Alfa Bank, one of
Russia’s biggest banks, whose owners have longstanding links to Mr.
Putin. While some F.B.I. officials initially believed that the computer
activity indicated an encrypted channel between Moscow and New York, the
bureau ultimately moved away from that view. The activity remains
unexplained.

There
is no confirmed evidence that the F.B.I. obtained a court warrant to
wiretap the Trump Organization or was capturing communications directly
from the Trump Organization.

During
the transition, the F.B.I. — which uses FISA warrants to eavesdrop on
the communications of foreign leaders inside the United States —
overheard conversations between the Russian ambassador to the United
States and Michael T. Flynn, whom Mr. Trump had named national security
adviser.

Mr.
Trump has pointedly and repeatedly questioned in conversations how it
was that Mr. Flynn’s conversations were recorded, and wondered who could
have issued a warrant.

The
Breitbart article cited mainstream news reports and concluded — going
beyond the public record — that the Obama administration had “obtained
authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign; continued monitoring
the Trump team even when no evidence of wrongdoing was found; then
relaxed the N.S.A. rules to allow evidence to be shared widely within
the government.”

Mr.
Levin, a day earlier, railed about what he called a “much bigger
scandal,” claiming — again with no proof — that Mr. Obama and his aides
had used “the instrumentalities of the federal government, intelligence
activity, to surveil members of the Trump campaign and put that
information out in the public.”

Several
senior members of Mr. Trump’s White House staff did not respond to an
email requesting on-the-record responses to more than a half-dozen
questions about Mr. Trump’s Twitter posts.

Representative
Adam B. Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee,
denounced the “willingness of the nation’s chief executive to make the
most outlandish and destructive claims without providing a scintilla of
evidence to support them.”

Even
some Republican lawmakers questioned Mr. Trump’s accusations. Senator
Ben Sasse of Nebraska issued a statement demanding that the president
reveal everything he knows about any wiretaps or warrants.

“The
president today made some very serious allegations, and the informed
citizens that a republic requires deserve more information,” Mr. Sasse
said, adding that “we are in the midst of a civilization-warping crisis
of public trust.”

Taping
calls seems to hold a spot in Mr. Trump’s consciousness. He spent many
years taping his own phone calls as a businessman. During the campaign,
Mr. Trump’s staff members told reporters they feared that their offices
were being bugged.

The
current president has frequently spoken about how much he admires Mr.
Obama for the gracious way he handled the transition. But since taking
office, Mr. Trump has frequently clashed with the intelligence agencies
over the Russia inquiries, including efforts to examine the attempts by
that country to influence the presidential election and the contacts
between Mr. Trump’s aides and the Russian government.

In
recent days, the president has appeared increasingly angry about leaks
of information that he believes are coming from law enforcement and
intelligence officials who are holdovers or recently departed from Mr.
Obama’s administration.

People
close to Mr. Trump have described him as determined to stop those
people from sabotaging his administration. One adviser said on Friday
that the president had been discussing a possible plan to try to prevent
leaks from occurring. The adviser declined to elaborate on what the
plan might entail.

Two
senior administration officials said Mr. Trump had tried for two days
to find a way to be on an offensive footing against the news articles
resulting from leaks; one person close to Mr. Trump said his explosive
claim was a result of that.

Mr.
Trump’s mood was said to be volatile even before he departed for his
weekend in Florida, with an episode in which he vented at his staff. The
president’s ire was trained in particular on Mr. McGahn, his White
House counsel, according to two people briefed on the matter.

Mr. Trump was said to be frustrated about the decision by Jeff Sessions, his attorney general, to recuse himself from participating
in any investigations of connections between the Trump campaign and
Russia. Mr. Trump has said there were no such connections. Mr. Trump,
who did not learn that Mr. Sessions was recusing himself until after the
decision was made, told aides that it gave an opening to his critics on
the Russia issue.

Michael D. Shear reported
from West Palm Beach, and Michael S. Schmidt from Washington. Reporting
was contributed by Matt Apuzzo, Charlie Savage and Eric Lichtblau from
Washington, and Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Martin from New York.

A version of this article appears in print on March 5, 2017, on Page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: With No Proof,Trump Claims Obama Tapped. Order Reprints|Today's Paper|Subscribe

Will Russia connection become the Trump administration's Watergate?

Saturday 4 March 2017 11.53 GMT
First published on Friday 3 March 2017 19.45 GMT

Donald Trump
flew out of Washington on Friday but was unable to leave a gathering
storm of allegations, intrigue and unanswered questions about his ties
to Russia behind him.The US president’s joint address to Congress this week was well
received but was rapidly overshadowed by revelations that his attorney
general, Jeff Sessions, had twice spoken with the Russian ambassador during last year’s presidential election.As it has emerged that other members of the Trump campaign –
including his son-in-law Jared Kushner – also met with the ambassador,
Sergey Kislyak, the Kremlin connection seems destined to be the putative
scandal that will not go away for the White House.

The relentless drip-drip of evidence has prompted comparisons with the Watergate affair that felled President Richard Nixon. It has also become regular sport for comedians on late-night TV.In Florida, the president was due to visit a school and meet
Republican leaders on Friday but Democrats kept up the pressure in
Washington. They argued that Sessions’ meetings with the ambassador
contradicted his own sworn statements to Congress during his
confirmation hearing. Sessions claimed on Thursday that he met the
ambassador in his capacity as a senator, not as a campaign surrogate.On Friday, the White House tried to steer criticism of Trump
associates and their meetings with Russian officials away, by drawing
parallels with Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer, who was
photographed meeting with the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, in
2003.In a characteristic diversionary tactic, Trump tweeted an old photo of Schumer
and Putin smiling and snacking together with the message: “We should
start an immediate investigation into @SenSchumer and his ties to Russia
and Putin. A total hypocrite!”Schumer swiftly replied: “Happily talk re: my contact w Mr. Putin
& his associates, took place in ’03 in full view of press &
public under oath. Would you &your team?

Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer)

Happily talk re: my contact w
Mr. Putin & his associates, took place in '03 in full view of press
& public under oath. Would you &your team? https://t.co/yXgw3U8tmQ

Speaking to reporters, the White House deputy press secretary Sarah
Sanders echoed the president: “I mean Chuck Schumer sitting and having
drinks with Putin and that’s not a news story, but apparently a
volunteer for a campaign bumping into one at a conference where there’s,
again, dozens of other ambassadors is newsworthy.”Nancy
Pelosi, the House minority leader, said the attorney general’s decision
to recuse himself from an investigation into Russian-backed hackers’
interference in last year’s presidential election did not go far enough.“Everybody knew that there was something completely out of order that
was going on, so for him to say, well, I was just meeting with him in
the normal course of a senator meeting with an ambassador, the Russian
ambassador, everybody knew was hacking our system is beyond naive,” she
told an event organised by Politico in Washington. “It’s almost
pathetic. It’s almost pathetic.“So he did not tell the truth, and now it has come out that he did
not tell the truth, and now what you see is there are other people in
the Trump administration
who have met with the Russian ambassador, in view of some one of the
biggest intelligence officers of the Russian government, in Washington
DC.”Some US media reports have suggested that Kislyak acts as a spy recruiter, a charge that Moscow has ridiculed as paranoia.

Putin’s man in Washington is usually far from view. Now
he’s at the center of a storm that brought down a key Trump ally and
threatens another

Pelosi added: “So this recusal is an admission that something went on
but it’s not sufficient. There are two things. One is the recusal as a
surrogate of then candidate Trump’s campaign and having communication
with the Russian government knowing they were hacking our system. That’s
what the recusal is about, however narrow it is.“The other part of it is the possibility of perjury, which is
punishable by law for anybody else. Certainly we should have that be
standard for the highest-ranking law enforcement person in our country.”Sessions, who was the first senator to endorse Trump for president,
told his confirmation hearing in January that he “did not have
communications with the Russians” and did not know of any by other
campaign staff.Democrats have variously called on him to recuse himself from all
potential investigations, retestify before Congress, resign or be
charged with perjury, while demanding an independent commission to
investigate. Richard Blumenthal, senator for Connecticut, urged the
embattled attorney general to return to the Senate judiciary committee
to “testify under oath” about the conversation at his office with
Kislyak.“I’d like him to explain what was said during that September 8
meeting,” Blumenthal told MSNBC’s Morning Joe program. “And what came of
it, and also what other meetings there may have been, because if he
misled us as to that meeting, what other meetings might he also have
failed to disclose?”The congressman Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House
intelligence committee, has called for Sessions to quit, saying he
“clearly misled” the Senate about contacts with Russian officials, and
demanded that a special prosecutor be appointed.

Schiff also accused the FBI director, James Comey, of
withholding crucial information about its investigation into Russian
meddling in the election, and raised the prospect of subpoenaing the
agency.“I
would say at this point we know less than a fraction of what the FBI
knows,” the California Democrat told reporters after a briefing with
Comey. “I appreciate we had a long briefing and testimony from the
director today, but in order for us to do our investigation in a
thorough and credible way, we’re gonna need the FBI to fully cooperate,
to be willing to tell us the length and breadth of any
counterintelligence investigations they are conducting. At this point,
the director was not willing to do that.”Speaking to Fox News on Thursday evening, Sessions, a former senator
from Alabama, reiterated that he did not discuss the campaign with
Kislyak. “When I campaigned for Trump, I was not involved with anything
like that,” he said. “You can be sure.”Despite the conclusions of US intelligence agencies, Sessions refused
to say whether Putin favoured Trump over Hillary Clinton in the
presidential race. “I have never been told that,” he told the host,
Tucker Carlson. “I don’t have any idea, Tucker – you’d have to ask
them.”

Trump has consistently denied business or political ties with Russia
but has also been conspicuously reluctant to criticise Putin and raised
the prospect of reviewing sanctions against the country. Opponents
argue there is circumstantial evidence that Trump colluded with Moscow
to help his campaign but definitive proof has remained elusive.Last month Trump’s national security adviser, Michael Flynn, was
forced to resign amid controversy over his discussions with Kislyak in
late December.On Thursday, it emerged that Kushner joined Flynn
at a private meeting with the ambassador at Trump Tower in New York.
Another campaign aide, Carter Page, did not deny meeting Kislyak during
the Republican national convention. And the Wall Street Journal reported
that Trump’s son, Donald Jr, was probably paid at least $50,000 for an
appearance late last year at a French thinktank whose founder and wife
have strong ties to Russia.Trump, meanwhile, said that Sessions was the target of a “witch-hunt” and declared his “total” confidence in him.He tweeted: “This whole narrative is a way of saving face for
Democrats losing an election that everyone thought they were supposed to
win. The Democrats are overplaying their hand. They lost the election,
and now they have lost their grip on reality.”

Since you’re here …

…
we’ve got a small favour to ask. More people are reading the Guardian
than ever, but far fewer are paying for it. Advertising revenues across
the media are falling fast. And unlike some other news organisations, we
haven’t put up a paywall – we want to keep our journalism open to all.
So you can see why we need to ask for your help. The Guardian’s
independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and
hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our perspective
matters – because it might well be your perspective, too.

If everyone who reads our reporting, who likes it, helps to support it, our future would be much more secure.

Some
senior Republicans have issued their boldest challenge with a vow to
get to the bottom of the matter, while Democrats have demanded an
independent probe. Yet even from early on in the Republican's bid to be president, Russia and its leader Vladimir Putin have loomed large.From warm words between leaders to a salacious dossier
compiled by a former MI6 agent, here are the links to Russia that have
overshadowed both Mr Trump's candidacy and his presidency.

The Trump and Putin 'bromance'

It was in the midst of the Republican primaries, with Mr
Trump's place as the party's frontrunner for the nomination far from
assured, when eyebrows were raised at the warm words exchanged by the
Russian leader and the Republican presidential candidate.Speaking after an annual televised press conference in December 2015, Mr Putin said the Republican candidate was "a very outstanding man, unquestionably talented". "It's not up to us to judge his virtue, that is up to US
voters, but he is an absolute leader of the presidential race," he
added.

Show more

Asked
how he how felt about the praise coming from "a man who kills
journalists, political opponents and invades countries", Mr Trump
said: "He’s running his country, and at least he’s a leader, you know,
unlike what we have in this country."

Mr Trump made headlines again in September when he compared Mr Putin favourably to Barack Obama. "The
man has very strong control over a country," Mr Trump said of the
Russian leader. "It's a very different system and I don't happen to like
the system, but certainly, in that system, he's been a leader, far more
than our president has been a leader."Mr Trump said he felt he could get along with the Russian
president, and was glad to have received a compliment from him. "Well I
think when he called me brilliant, I'll take the compliment, okay?" Mr
Trump said. "Look, it's not going to get him anywhere. I'm a
negotiator."Having won the election in November, the then president-elect continued to woo his Russian counterpart, praising Mr Putin as "very smart" for not engaging in a tit-for-tat row with the US over the expulsion of 35 Russian diplomats accused of espionage.

Instead
of taking retaliatory action, Mr Putin said: "Further steps towards the
restoration of Russian-American relations will be built on the basis of
the policy which the administration of President D. Trump will carry
out."

Jeff Sessions recuses himself from Russia probe

Just three weeks after
being confirmed as the country's attorney general, Mr Sessions faced
calls to resign after it emerged he had two conversations with the
Russian ambassador to the United States during the presidential campaign
season last year.Mr Sessions, an early supporter of President Donald Trump
and a policy adviser to the Republican candidate, did not disclose those
communications at his confirmation hearing in January when asked
whether "anyone affiliated" with the campaign had contact with the
Russians.“I’m not aware of any of those activities,” he responded. “I
have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I
did not have communications with the Russians.”

Justice Department spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores said "there was absolutely nothing misleading about his answer."As attorney general, Mr Sessions oversees the justice
department, including the FBI, which have been leading investigations
into Russian meddling and any links to Mr Trump's associates.Mr Sessions insisted he had done nothing wrong and was acting in his capacity as a senator. But he said he was happy to follow the counsel of his ethics advisers at the department of justice who said he should step aside from the FBI’s investigation.Nancy Pelosi, the house Democratic leader, led calls for his
resignation. "Jeff Sessions lied under oath during his confirmation
hearing before the Senate," Ms Pelosi said in a statement released on
Thursday. "Sessions is not fit to serve as the top law enforcement
officer of our country and must resign."

Michael Flynn and the lifting of sanctions

In the biggest blow to Mr Trump's nascent presidency, his National Security Adviser Michael Flynn resigned after it emerged he held secret talks with Russia before entering the White House. Mr Flynn admitted in his resignation letter he took several
calls with the Russian ambassador to the US before entering the White
House, which is potentially illegal under the 1799 Logan Act.Mr Flynn, who has argued for closer ties with Russia,
has acknowledged being paid to give a speech and attend a lavish
anniversary party in December 2015 for the state-controlled RT
television network in Moscow, where he sat beside Mr Putin. But he
hasn't said who wrote the check or for how much. An RT video from the
Moscow event showed Mr Flynn rising during a standing ovation following
the Russian leader's address.

According
to the Washington Post, Mr Flynn "privately discussed US sanctions
against Russia with that country’s ambassador to the United States
during the month before President Trump took office."As president-elect, Mr Trump suggested he scrap the sanctions
- imposed by the Obama administration in late December in response to
Moscow's alleged cyber attacks - if Moscow proves helpful in battling
terrorists and reaching other goals important to Washington. "If you get
along and if Russia is really helping us, why would anybody have
sanctions if somebody's doing some really great things?" he told the
Wall Street Journal.

US law
enforcement and intelligence agencies intercepted the communications
around the same time they were discovering evidence that Russia was
trying to disrupt the presidential election by hacking into the
Democratic National Committee, three of the officials said, according to
the Times.

The
intelligence agencies then sought to learn whether the Trump campaign
was colluding with the Russians on the hacking or other efforts to
influence the election, the newspaper said. The officials interviewed in
recent weeks said they had seen no evidence of such cooperation so far,
it said.However, the intercepts alarmed U.S. intelligence and law
enforcement agencies, in part because of the amount of contact that was
occurring while Mr Trump was speaking glowingly about Mr Putin.

The Associated Press reported in August that Mr Manafort
helped a pro-Russian Ukrainian political party secretly move $2.2
million to two major Washington lobbying firms. The transfers were
reportedly set up using a non-profit organisation - to obscure the
Ukrainian party's attempts to influence US policies.

Mr
Trump tweeted on Wednesday morning that the accusations were "merely an
attempt to cover-up the many mistakes made in Hillary Clinton's losing
campaign".He
added: "Information is being illegally given to the failing @nytimes
& @washingtonpost by the intelligence community".

Paul Manafort

However, it was his business dealings in Russia and Ukraine that ultimately led to his resignation as campaign chairman.

US
law requires lobbying firms to register and report in detail to the
Justice Department any ties to foreign political parties or leaders.

Furthermore,
the Ukrainian National Anti-Corruption Bureau claimed a secret ledger
showed Mr Manafort had been earmarked $12.7 million in off-the-books
cash payments from the pro-Russian political party of Viktor Yanukovych,
Ukraine's former president.Mr Manafort called the allegations "unfounded, silly, and nonsensical". Yet the damage was done.

The former MI6 spy's dossier

Arguably the most explosive reports concerning Mr Trump's
dealings in Russia was a dossier compiled by a former MI6 agent that
emerged in January, shortly before he was due to enter the White House.The file was compiled by former British spy Christopher
Steele and was initially funded by anti-Trump Republicans, and later by
Democrats.The 35-page document alleges
the Kremlin colluded with Mr Trump’s presidential campaign and that the
Russian security services have material that could be used to blackmail
him, including an allegation that he paid prostitutes to defile a bed
that had been slept in by Barack and Michelle Obama.

Mr
Trump said the publishing of the report was "something Nazi Germany
would have done" and called the dossier "fake news" and "phony stuff".It also meant his already strained relationship with the
intelligence community deteriorated further. "I think it was
disgraceful, disgraceful that the intelligence agencies allowed any
information that turned out to be so false and fake out there," he
said.

One
of Mr Sessions' conversations with Ambassador Sergey Kislyak occurred
at a July event on the sidelines of the Republican National Convention
in Cleveland. At that same event, the ambassador also spoke with Mr
Page, a person with knowledge of the discussion told AP.In an interview with MSNBC, Mr Page said: "I never met him anywhere outside of Cleveland."

President Trump, an Unlikely Champion of Affordable Child Care

Snack time at the Willard Community Center child-care program in Lincoln, Neb.Credit
Kristin Streff/The Journal-Star, via Associated Press

In
his address to Congress Tuesday evening, President Trump leaned on some
of his standard crowd pleasers: immigration, jobs, terrorism.

But
he also revived one of his more surprising proposals, first introduced
on the campaign trail last year: “My administration wants to work with
members of both parties to make child care accessible and affordable,”
he said.

That
rhetoric makes Mr. Trump sound more like Hillary Clinton than Ronald
Reagan. And a potential debate over child-care policy could offer the
rare opportunity for the president and Democrats to cooperate — or at
least have a dialogue — over the coming year.

Mr.
Trump is not the first Republican president to demonstrate an interest
in child-care policy. During his 1968 campaign, Richard Nixon promised
to expand access to government-funded day care. But three years later,
influenced by the rise of the Christian right, Mr. Nixon vetoed the only universal child-care bill to pass Congress.

Although
a few of today’s mainstream Republicans, like Senator Marco Rubio of
Florida, have promoted child-care proposals, the official G.O.P.
platform does not mention the issue. Conservatives tend to view
government-funded child care as an expensive and unwanted intrusion into
family life. The position of House Speaker Paul Ryan — whose support
Mr. Trump would presumably need to enact a child-care plan — is a case
in point. In his 2014 report on poverty, Mr. Ryan fretted over the results of research on Quebec’s public child-care program, which is known for its lax educational standards.
Such subsidized care “encourages married women to enter the labor
force,” the Ryan report said, leading to “a number of negative
behavioral and health outcomes for the children.” (What Mr. Ryan didn’t
mention: a competing body of research showing that high-quality day care helps children thrive academically.)

Arguments about the wisdom of working motherhood tend to ignore the fact that working motherhood is the norm. More than half
of American mothers work in the year after giving birth, as do 64
percent of women with children under the age of 6, according to the
Bureau of Labor Statistics. Working parents require child care, and the
typical American family spends 29 percent
of its after-tax income on child-care costs, compared with 10 percent
or less in many other Western democracies, where child care is provided
for or heavily subsidized by the state. Average annual tuition at an
American day care center is nearly $10,000, and as much as $30,000 for a high-quality program in cities like New York and Los Angeles.

The
issue has been something of a political orphan in recent years.
Feminist organizers have focused more on equal pay and paid parental
leave, while education reformers have rarely emphasized the period
between birth and pre-K enrollment — even though those years are crucial
for cognitive development. President Barack Obama’s 2015 plan to increase existing child-care tax credits to a maximum of $3,000 a child from $1,050 went nowhere.

As
a presidential candidate, Mrs. Clinton introduced an ambitious proposal
to cap child-care costs at 10 percent of a family’s income. But during a
campaign season dominated by scandal, Mrs. Clinton’s plan got little
attention. Mr. Trump’s tentative forays into child-care policy and paid
parental leave — another traditional Democratic issue that he mentioned
Tuesday in his speech — have attracted more interest, in part because
they are unexpected from a Republican standard-bearer.

Under
the plan, individuals earning up to $250,000 a year, and couples
earning up to $500,000, would be able to deduct from their taxable
income the average cost of child care in their states. The benefit would
be modest; for example, a reduction of $840 in federal taxes for a
family earning $70,000 a year and paying $7,000 for child care. The plan
would offer low-income workers child-care rebates, paid once a year
through the earned-income tax credit. The proposal also calls for
dedicated savings accounts in which families could invest pretax income
to cover child care and elder care costs, as well as incentives for employers to provide child care in the workplace.

Those
without wages, like unemployed single parents seeking work or attending
job training, would not benefit from the Trump subsidies and are
underserved by existing programs. The Child Care and Development Block
Grant was created in 1996 as part of welfare reform and was intended to
help the poorest parents afford day care. Those benefits currently reach
only one out of every 10 eligible children, according to the National Association for the Education of Young Children.

Despite its limited reach, the Trump plan is expensive. An analysis
by the Tax Policy Center found it would cost $115 billion over 10
years, most likely making it a nonstarter for Republicans. The proposal
also offers little to the working poor, a potential problem for
Democratic champions of child care, like Nancy Pelosi and Bernie
Sanders. The average annual benefit would be just $10 for families
earning $10,000 to $30,000 a year, according to the Tax Policy Center.

It
is difficult to square President Trump’s child-care plan with his other
budget priorities. Carrie L. Lukas, managing director of the
conservative Independent Women’s Forum, supports Mr. Trump’s efforts to
help families with child-care costs. But “he also talked about the need
for tax simplification,” she said, “which is inconsistent with using
deductions” as a social policy strategy.

Still,
Ms. Lukas is enthusiastic about some aspects of the Trump proposal,
including the fact that married couples with one stay-at-home parent
would be able to claim the same tax deduction as many dual-income
couples whose children are enrolled in child care. That is an unusual
element of the plan; after all, parents who care for their children at
home do not incur costs for day care tuition or nanny salaries.

Traditionally,
many European nations that enacted government-supported child care had
the goal of encouraging maternal employment. More working women means
more tax revenue, and better, more accessible child care helps convince
parents that they can afford to have more children, who in turn will
become future taxpayers supporting the welfare state.

That
is not a conservative vision. “It shouldn’t be about pushing to get
people into 9-to-5 jobs and kids into day care,” Ms. Lukas said. “That’s
not an appropriate role for government. I’ve got five kids, and there
are a lot of nonworking parents in my community. They are not only
taking care of their own kids, but they are volunteering at school.”

Though
she describes herself as a “a libertarian conservative type of person,”
Ms. Lukas enrolled her own children in Germany’s government child-care
system when the family was stationed in Berlin for her husband’s job.
The day care centers “were very expensive for taxpayers,” she said, but
she was impressed by the quality of the staff, whose training is
subsidized by the German government. “It’s a very serous profession, a
very respectable career to pursue,” Ms. Lukas said. “That’s not always
the case in America.”

Indeed, the median salary of an American child care worker is about $20,000 a year, a problem the Trump plan does not address.

Elaine
Maag, senior research associate at the Tax Policy Center, said the
president’s proposal would not “increase the amount of child care
available, nor will it increase the quality of care that low-income
families will be able to access.” However, Ms. Maag said she was willing
to give the president at least a little credit. “I would characterize
the plan as identifying an important problem,” she said.

We
were going to Canada in the summer. “When we are in Edmonton”, I said
to Christoph Cremer, “let’s make a quick trip to Seattle”. And that’s
how it happened. At Edmonton Airport we climbed into a plane and two
hours later we landed in the city where Betty had lived. I was so happy
to be in Seattle at last and to be able to trace Betty’s tracks!

Wolfgang Hampel had told Betty’s friends about our arrival.They
were happy to plan a small marathon through the town and it’s
surroundings with us. We only had a few days free. One should not
underestimate Wolfgang’s talent in speedily mobilizing Betty’s friends,
even though it was holiday time. E-mails flew backwards and forwards
between Heidelberg and Seattle, and soon a well prepared itinerary was
ready for us. Shortly before my departure Wolfgang handed me several
parcels, presents for Betty MacDonald's friends. I rushed to pack the
heavy gifts in my luggage but because of the extra weight had to throw
out a pair of pajamas!

After we had landed we took a taxi to the
Hotel in downtown Seattle. I was so curious to see everything. I
turned my head in all directions like one of the hungry hens from
Betty’s farm searching for food! Fortunately it was quite a short
journey otherwise I would have lost my head like a loose screw!Our
hotel room was on the 22nd floor and looked directly out onto the
16-lane highway. There might have been even more than 16 but it made me
too giddy to count! It was like a glimpse of hell! “And is this
Seattle?” I asked myself. I was horrified! The cars racing by were
enough to drive one mad. The traffic roared by day and night. We
immediately contacted Betty MacDonald's friends and let them know we had
arrived and they confirmed the times when we should see them.

On
the next morning I planned my first excursion tracing Betty’s tracks. I
spread out the map of Seattle. “Oh dear” I realized “the Olympic
Peninsula is much too far away for me to get there.” Betty nodded to me! “Very difficult, Letizia, without a car.”

“But I so much wanted to see your chicken farm”

“My chickens are no longer there and you can admire the mountains from a distance”

But
I wanted to go there. I left the hotel and walked to the waterfront
where the State Ferry terminal is. Mamma mia, the streets in Seattle are
so steep! I couldn’t prevent my feet from running down the hill. Why
hadn’t I asked for brakes to be fixed on my shoes? I looked at the
drivers. How incredibly good they must be to accelerate away from the
red traffic lights. The people were walking uphill towards me as briskly
as agile salmon. Good heavens, these Americans! I tried to keep my
balance. The force of gravity is relentless. I grasped hold of objects
where I could and staggered down.In Canada a friend had warned me that in Seattle I would see a lot of people with crutches.

Betty laughed. “ It’s not surprising, Letizia, walking salmon don’t fall directly into the soft mouth of a bear!”“ Betty, stop making these gruesome remarks. We are not in Firlands!”

I
went further. Like a small deranged ant at the foot of a palace monster
I came to a tunnel. The noise was unbearable. On the motorway, “The
Alaskan Way Viaduct”, cars, busses and trucks were driving at the speed
of light right over my head. They puffed out their poisonous gas into
the open balconies and cultivated terraces of the luxurious sky-
scrapers without a thought in the world. America! You are crazy!“Betty,
are all people in Seattle deaf? Or is it perhaps a privilege for
wealthy people to be able to enjoy having cars so near to their eyes and
noses to save them from boredom?”

“When the fog democratically allows everything to disappear into nothing, it makes a bit of a change, Letizia”

“ Your irony is incorrigible, Betty, but tell me, Seattle is meant to be a beautiful city, But where?”I had at last reached the State Ferry terminal.

“No
Madam, the ferry for Vashon Island doesn’t start from here,” one of the
men in the ticket office tells me. ”Take a buss and go to the ferry
terminal in West Seattle.”Betty explained to me “The island lies in
Puget Sound and not in Elliott Bay! It is opposite the airport. You must
have seen it when you were landing!”“Betty, when I am landing I shut my eyes and pray!”

It’s time for lunch. The weather is beautiful and warm. Who said to me that it always rains here?“Sure
to be some envious man who wanted to frighten you away from coming to
Seattle. The city is really beautiful, you’ll see. Stay by the
waterfront, choose the best restaurant with a view of Elliott Bay and
enjoy it.”“Thank you Betty!”I find a table on the
terrace of “Elliott’s Oyster House”. The view of the island is
wonderful. It lies quietly in the sun like a green fleecy cushion on the
blue water. Betty plays with my words:“Vashon Island is a big
cushion, even bigger than Bainbridge which you see in front of your
eyes, Letizia. The islands look similar. They have well kept houses and
beautiful gardens”.

I relax during this introduction, “Bainbridge” you are Vashon Island, and order a mineral water.

“At one time the hotel belonging to the parents of Monica Sone stood on the waterfront.”“Oh, of your friend Kimi!” Unfortunately I forget to ask Betty exactly where it was.

My mind wanders and I think of my mountain hike back to the hotel! “Why is there no donkey for tourists?” Betty laughs:

“I’m sure you can walk back to the hotel. “Letizia can do everything.””

“Yes, Betty, I am my own donkey!”But
I don’t remember that San Francisco is so steep. It doesn’t matter, I
sit and wait. The waiter comes and brings me the menu. I almost fall off
my chair!“ What, you have geoduck on the menu! I have to try it” (I
confess I hate the look of geoduck meat. Betty’s recipe with the pieces
made me feel quite sick – I must try Betty’s favourite dish!)“Proof that you love me!” said Betty enthusiastically “ Isn’t the way to the heart through the stomach?”

I order the geoduck. The waiter looks at me. He would have liked to recommend oysters. “Geoduck no good for you!”Had he perhaps read my deepest thoughts? Fate! Then no geoduck. “No good for me.”“Neither geoduck nor tuberculosis in Seattle” whispered Betty in my ear! “Oh Betty, my best friend, you take such good care of me!”

I order salmon with salad.

“Which salmon? Those that swim in water or those that run through Seattle?”

“Betty, I believe you want me to have a taste of your black humour.”

“Enjoy it then, Letizia.”During lunch we talked about tuberculosis, and that quite spoilt our appetite.“Have you read my book “The Plague and I”?”

“Oh Betty, I’ve started to read it twice but both times I felt so sad I had to stop again!”

“But
why?” asked Betty “Nearly everybody has tuberculosis! I recovered very
quickly and put on 20 pounds! There was no talk of me wasting away! What
did you think of my jokes in the book?”

“Those would have been a
good reason for choosing another sanitorium. I would have been afraid
of becoming a victim of your humour! You would have certainly given me a
nickname! You always thought up such amusing names!” Betty laughed.

“You’re
right. I would have called you “Roman nose”. I would have said to Urbi
and Orbi “ Early this morning “Roman nose” was brought here. She speaks
broken English, doesn’t eat geoduck but she does love cats.”

“Oh
Betty, I would have felt so ashamed to cough. To cough in your presence,
how embarrassing! You would have talked about how I coughed, how many
coughs!”

“It depends on that “how”, Letizia!”

“Please,
leave Goethe quotations out of it. You have certainly learnt from the
Indians how to differentiate between noises. It’s incredible how you
can distinguish between so many sorts of cough! At least 10!”

“So few?”

”And
also your descriptions of the patients and the nurses were pitiless. An
artistic revenge! The smallest pimple on their face didn’t escape your
notice! Amazing.”

“ I was also pitiless to myself. Don’t forget my irony against myself!”

Betty
was silent. She was thinking about Kimi, the “Princess” from Japan! No,
she had only written good things about her best friend, Monica Sone, in
her book “The Plague and I”. A deep friendship had started in the
hospital. The pearl that developed from the illness.“Isn’t it
wonderful, Betty, that an unknown seed can make its way into a mollusk
in the sea and develop into a beautiful jewel?” Betty is paying
attention.

“Betty, the friendship between you and Monica reminds
me of Goethe’s poem “Gingo-Biloba”. You must know it?” Betty nods and I
begin to recite it:

The leaf of this Eastern treeWhich has been entrusted to my gardenOffers a feast of secret significance,For the edification of the initiate.

Is it one living thing.That has become divided within itself?Are these two who have chosen each other,So that we know them as one?

The
friendship with Monica is like the wonderful gingo-biloba leaf, the
tree from the east. Betty was touched. There was a deep feeling of trust
between us. “Our friendship never broke up, partly because she was
in distress, endangered by the deadly illness. We understood and
supplemented each other. We were like one lung with two lobes, one from
the east and one from the west!”“A beautiful picture, Betty. You were like two red gingo-biloba leaves!”

Betty
was sad and said ” Monica, although Japanese, before she really knew me
felt she was also an American. But she was interned in America,
Letizia, during the second world war. Isn’t that terrible?”

“Betty,
I never knew her personally. I have only seen her on a video, but what
dignity in her face, and she speaks and moves so gracefully!”

“Fate could not change her”

“Yes, Betty, like the gingo-biloba tree in Hiroshima. It was the only tree that blossomed again after the atom bomb!”

The
bill came and I paid at once. In America one is urged away from the
table when one has finished eating. If one wants to go on chatting one
has to order something else.“That’s why all those people gossiping
at the tables are so fat!” Betty remarks. “Haven’t you seen how many
massively obese people walk around in the streets of America. Like
dustbins that have never been emptied!” With this typically
unsentimental remark Betty ended our conversation.

Ciao! I so
enjoyed the talk; the humour, the irony and the empathy. I waved to her
and now I too felt like moving! I take a lovely walk along the
waterfront.

Now I am back in Heidelberg and when I think about
how Betty’s “Princessin” left this world on September 5th and that in
August I was speaking about her with Betty in Seattle I feel very sad.
The readers who knew her well (we feel that every author and hero of a
book is nearer to us than our fleeting neighbours next door) yes we, who
thought of her as immortal, cannot believe that even she would die
after 92 years. How unforeseen and unexpected that her death should come
four days after her birthday on September 1th. On September 5th I was
on my way to Turkey, once again in seventh heaven, looking back on the
unforgettable days in Seattle. I was flying from west to east towards
the rising sun.

About Me

Betty MacDonald Fan Club, founded by Wolfgang Hampel, has members in 40 countries.
Wolfgang Hampel, author of Betty MacDonald biography interviewed Betty MacDonald's family and friends. His Interviews have been published on CD and DVD by Betty MacDonald Fan Club. If you are interested in the Betty MacDonald Biography or the Betty MacDonald Interviews send us a mail, please.
Several original Interviews with Betty MacDonald are available.
We are also organizing international Betty MacDonald Fan Club Events for example, Betty MacDonald Fan Club Eurovision Song Contest Meetings in Oslo and Düsseldorf, Royal Wedding Betty MacDonald Fan Club Event in Stockholm and Betty MacDonald Fan Club Fifa Worldcup Conferences in South Africa and Germany.
Betty MacDonald Fan Club Honour Members are Monica Sone, author of Nisei Daughter and described as Kimi in Betty MacDonald's The Plague and I, Betty MacDonald's nephew, artist and writer Darsie Beck, Betty MacDonald fans and beloved authors and artists Gwen Grant, Letizia Mancino, Perry Woodfin, Traci Tyne Hilton, Tatjana Geßler, music producer Bernd Kunze, musician Thomas Bödigheimer, translater Mary Holmes and Mr. Tigerli.